THE SENATE is due to vote today on two proposals to confront the soaring cost of prescription drugs. The first measure, which faces an uphill struggle, would add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare. The second, known as the Edwards-Collins bill, would drive down drug prices by boosting competition from generic drug makers. If the first measure passes, the two will be stapled together, making an attractive package for members to show off to their constituents. The generic drug initiative is simpler and more clearly attractive. It would limit drug companies'' ability to extend patents beyond their normal expiration dates and would save consumers $60 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. At present, drug companies get an extra 30 months of patent protection if they assert that a generic competitor is infringing on some rule or other; the extension is automatic, no matter how flimsy the assertion. What''s more, drug companies can get multiple extensions on a single drug if it is protected by multiple patents. The Edwards-Collins bill would limit each drug to a single automatic extension; companies that feel that secondary patents are being infringed would have to persuade a judge to grant an injunction keeping competitors off the market. The Edwards-Collins bill would also deter another anti-competitive trick, whereby patent holders pay generic makers not to produce cheap knockoffs. The drug companies object that the Senate bill is an attack on the patent system. It is only an attempt to close loopholes in it. The companies protest that they won''t be able to afford research if their patents are curtailed. But the pharmaceutical sector is by some measures the most profitable part of the economy. The companies claim that rising drug costs, which have created the momentum behind the Senate bill, are actually a good sign, since wider use of drugs means less use of other medical services such as hospitals. But drug costs are booming not only because the number of prescriptions has grown but also because the average prescription price jumped 10 percent last year. The Senate should pass the Edwards-Collins bill whatever the fate of the Medicare drug proposal. But Medicare reform also deserves to pass, particularly in its latest Senate version. The trick with Medicare is to balance the real need for drug coverage against the huge costs involved, particularly at a time when the federal budget is headed for huge deficits. Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) have written an amendment that meets this challenge by targeting a drug benefit at poor seniors and at those with drug costs exceeding $4,000 a year. Their colleagues should support them.
Wednesday, July 31, 2002 pg. A18 © 2002 The Washington Post Company